When belong comes with conditions

My journey with hearing loss in South Africa

There is a common assumption that all people who experience hearing loss share the same identity, the same communication preferences, and the same aspirations. My experience has taught me that this is simply not true.

I became deaf later in life. Like many others in my situation, I chose to rebuild my life through spoken language, speech-reading, hearing technology, aural rehabilitation, and later bilateral cochlear implants. It was not a rejection of South African Sign Language (SASL) or Deaf culture. It was simply the path that best suited me and my family.

What I did not expect was that my choice would come at the cost of belonging.

During my early journey, I encountered attitudes from some members of the Deaf community that left me feeling I had to make an impossible choice: either learn South African Sign Language, identify with Deaf culture, or accept that I might never truly be welcomed.

For someone already grieving the loss of hearing, this was devastating.

The hearing world remained largely inaccessible because communication barriers were everywhere. Yet the community I hoped would understand my journey sometimes viewed my communication choices with suspicion rather than acceptance.

My family also longed to be accepted. Instead, they sometimes experienced the perception that their father's commitment to Total Communication, speechreading, cochlear implants, and lipspeakers somehow represented a "betrayal." Some believed that these choices weakened the position of South African Sign Language or threatened the role of sign language interpreters.

This was especially painful during the years when the Deaf community was rightly advocating for the recognition of South African Sign Language as an official language. I fully respected that struggle. I never opposed the recognition of SASL. Every linguistic and cultural community deserves dignity, respect, and recognition.

My advocacy was never against sign language.

It has always been about choice.

I believed then, and I still believe today, that every person who experiences hearing loss should have the right to choose the communication methods that best meet their own needs—whether that is South African Sign Language, spoken language, Total Communication, cochlear implants, hearing aids, speech-reading, captions, lip-speakers, assistive listening technology, or a combination of these approaches.

In 2011, when I received bilateral cochlear implants, the criticism became even more personal. As a public advocate, I was openly labelled by some as an "enemy" of the Deaf community. That was deeply hurtful because I had never campaigned against Deaf people or against sign language. My only message was that diversity exists within hearing loss and that every individual deserves respect for their own choices.

My experience does not diminish the lived experiences of Deaf South Africans. Nor do their experiences diminish mine. Hearing loss is diverse, and an inclusive society should be broad enough to embrace us all. Sadly, this lack of recognition continues to influence accessibility in South Africa today.

South Africa has made significant progress in recognising South African Sign Language. However, accessibility policies and practices often continue to focus predominantly on SASL interpreting, despite the broader concept of reasonable accommodation contained in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and South Africa's White Paper on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

According to the World Report on Hearing, approximately 12 million South Africans experience some degree of hearing loss, the majority of whom do not primarily communicate through sign language.

While South African Sign Language interpreters are essential for many Deaf South Africans, they are not the only accommodation required. Millions of South Africans rely on captions, speech-to-text services, hearing loops, assistive listening systems, lip-speakers, clear speech, hearing technology, and other forms of communication support.

Yet many of these accommodations remain largely unavailable. A simple example can be seen on television. Many news bulletins include South African Sign Language interpreters but still do not provide accurate real-time captions. This unintentionally excludes millions of South Africans who depend on written text rather than sign language to access important information.

Accessibility should never become a competition between communication methods.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities recognises the diversity of persons with disabilities and the importance of respecting individual choices. Equity means recognising different needs, not assuming that one accommodation fits everyone.

No one should ever be forced to choose between belonging and communicating in the way that works best for them.

I share this story not to reopen old wounds, but because I believe healing begins when people listen to one another. My hope is that South Africa can move beyond ideological divisions and embrace a broader understanding of inclusion—one that respects Deaf culture while equally recognising the legitimate experiences of people who are deaf, hard of hearing, hearing impaired, cochlear implant users, hearing aid users, oral communicators, and those who use South African Sign Language.

True inclusion does not ask people to conform.

It respects diversity.

And perhaps, if one person has the courage to tell their story with honesty and compassion, others who have silently carried the same pain will realise that they are not alone.

Fanie du Toit

Fanie Dreams Movement

Dreaming of an inclusive world where everyone belongs.